0551e80yfandomcom-20200214-history
User talk:0551E80Y
I think this is a very healthy thing to do as the Help:Best practices for administrators page says. "Just like in a democracy, when a community votes on decisions rather than decisions being made by an admin, it sets up an important relationship between admins and the community that says the community is the most important decision-maker for the community. Admins have lots of extra editing tools that non-admins don't have, but making community decisions puts admins into the position of not being the most important part of a community." Plus a bright side to this for the ones who has the tools, is by putting here rather then on a bureaucrat's user talk page; Could remove a lot of the stress and annoyance, that user who has those privalges, would have to put up with, by seeing it first thing when they log onto here to start editing. They wouldn't have to see how the debate goes on until a conclusion is reached and can focus on mainting the wiki's contents. They can however freely choose to join in if they want. It's ultimately up to them; But i personally would rather have the beaucrats step back and just watch while non admins and admins debate about it among the community. The benefits for non admin users is that they canwrite down as much as they want, expressing their thoughts and opinions on the matter in their "rawest" form (within modesty and boundry to the rules of being civil about it) without the ones who can make the descion, talking back and trying to dilute it while it's still being processed rather then it's full form as the user wants it presented as they are expressing themselves, if the beuarcrats choose to not join in on the debate. This would also allow non admin users and new users to meet those being talked about for promotion to know them better as more even ground between the bigger community. My thoughts for those who are candiates for promotion would be to explore the wider wikia community and see other wikis and their admins, to see how they are run and what their reputation is like. Some are excellent with a strong healthy relationship between admins and users with less users breaking rules and having more freedom to edit without worrying about consequences. Others are unnecessarily harsh with constant enforcement of the rules on users to the point of admins being cruel about it with long blocks over simple minor offenses and the admins are mostly driving all the info of wikis. This would allow canditates to get a deeper insight into how they want to be seen as if they get these privialges and choose to make the same choices as the admins on wikis that they have visted. I would also reccomend them to vist the blogs of the Wikia Staff on their philosphies, opinions stances and guides to be great editors and Wikipedia's essays as well. These are my thoughts. I personally since i've gotten my prvialges have made have done some actions that the community wasn't happy about which could be seen as mistakes so i try to correct them and will be focusing my time on improving my editing skills and knowledge from these experts. 0551E80Y (talk) 14:18, May 19, 2018 (UTC)